Women Get Lots of Info From Male Faces

dtjohnson writes "Researchers at UC Santa Barbara have found that women have a remarkable ability to assess a man's testosterone levels and his interest in fathering children by looking at his facial features. Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly judge a man's interest in having children merely by looking at cues on photograph's of his facial features. Saliva samples were also taken from each man in the study and tested for testosterone with a $2,000-a-pop test. The women in the study were able to correctly identify the men with the highest testosterone levels just by looking at their photographs. Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts."

Comments

Ok then

[fireman sam]

So what we have here is researchers have discovered what physical attributes of men women find attractive (whether they want short term or long term relationships). Just as it is known what physical attributes of women men find attractive.

So women don't just want a "nice on the inside" type of man.

Small sample size?

[presidentbeef]

A group of 29 undergraduate students hardly seems enough to be able to generalize the results to the entire female gender.

Re:Small sample size?

[Surt]

I think it's more of a conflict between the press presentation and an understanding of detailed statistics. When you get the press presentation, it says that women can tell a man's level of testosterone. When you read the statistics, you find that with a >95% confidence level, the researchers have concluded that the participant's ratings matched testosterone level better than random chance would allow, implying that at least some of the women were getting the answers right enough that they must have been recognizing something. The numbers of participants required to make these conclusions are well understood. 20 participants is roughly the lower bound for studies of this type, and I'm sure in the actual research paper that various weaknesses of the sample were discussed (age, race distribution and such) as they nearly always are. But the press presentation will contain none of that, because the fraction of their readers who would understand the details is very small.

Translation

[ebrandsberg]

Women are able to judge someone with aggressive genes that can father a strong child, then pick a sucker to stand with her to raise them.

Re:Translation

[Anonymous Coward]

and why they whine why there are no "nice guys" while they are screwing jerks.

Right. Then why do so many women screw up?

[SmallFurryCreature]

The study starts wonky. Men are show pictures of adults and babies and asked wich they prefer. Mmmm, okay. In what context? Could be they had a bunch of extreme pedo's on their hand.

Rather then testing wich photograph someone likes better perhaps a better test to see if a male is truly intrested in being a father is to see if he is one? Baby pictures are cute. Crying shitting sex-ruining babies are not.

As for what women find more attractive. Well wasn't there another study not so long ago that claimed that it depended on the point in their cycle? So what point in their cycle where these women on?

Personally I think the result of 60% is to close to 50% wich you could easily reach by flipping a coin. Throw in a few extreme photos of men and you got a winner. Michael Jackson vs Bob Sapp (girly man vs the guy that is gonna be your bunk mate in federal jail).

Not so hard to judge the hormone levels there eh?

Did the study look at how these women that guessed right actually did in there personal lives? Any single mothers or battered women? Oh they were students. Any of them been date raped?

Frankly this study seems totally worthless. Offcourse you can tell hormones from facial features. Duh, everyone knows that it is hormones that decide your body build. Just swallow the opposites sex hormones for a while to find out.

And testing men for the desire to be a father by showing them cute baby pictures is just stupid. Ask them "It has been 8 months since you last had sex, 2 months since you last had a full nights sleep, the baby is crying and your wive asks you to get out while she has been at home all day doing shit all and you been working hard to pay for that bloody nurse that costs a fortune and need to go to work again in 2 hours. Do you love your baby now (that probably ain't yours anyway because women like guys with manly faces not saps like you) sucker?".

That would be a proper test. If women were capable of doing such a test we wouldn't have so many single mothers living of benefits. Social security is a good thing and I am willing to pay for it but only if I am allowed to think people who need it are a bunch of fuckwads.

Re:sensationalisation sucks

[malsdavis]

Indeed, the trade-off is often debatable.

But in this instance I am referring to the preferable use of a news source which actually cares about the facts of the study over a news source which is simply using the research as a launching point for the journalist to present stereotyped opinions on male and female attraction.

Re:sensationalisation sucks

[AhtirTano]

Besides, doesn't He have better things to do than kill time on /.? :-)

Given that He's omnipotent, I suspect He can past on /., digg, and Kuro5hin, all at the same time--and still have time to attach meaning to the fall of every sparrow.

The real question is: How often does He get modded as a troll for claiming He created the world in seven days?

Re:Slashdot using daily nexus as source?

[node 3]

What is wrong with having a weekly sex column and how does having one make a paper untrustworthy?

Don't get involved with single mothers

[Anonymous Coward]

Old Slashdotter to young slashdotters: do not get saddled with a ready made family. Do not get in the situation of being financially responsible for an alpha's seed.

When a single mother coworker hits on you ... then you not interested.
When a female coworker tries to set you up with her single mother (friend/daughter/neighbor) ... then you not interested.

Trust me and not your penis! Avoid these women like the avian flu. They'll stop f*cking you a month after the wedding. They will ruin your life and drain you financially.

Re:Don't get involved with single mothers

[quarterbrain]

You poor naive soul. Every woman stops giving it up once you've gotten married.

And while we're generalizing, every man that takes a wife or even a girlfriend has to divert energy away from what they want to attending to her needs seriously altering your life. There's also a vigorous sucking in the trouser area that occurs - unfortunately it quickly moves from where you want to somewhere in your wallet.

Stupid and Fairly Insulting

[kria]

As a woman, I am as insulted by the suggestion that I'm just out to find a man to be a good father as many men are at the suggestion that they just looks for big breasts and the like. This study wasn't looking at which men women would really date - it looked at their reaction to pictures. Whooptefreakingdo.

Perhaps I'm spoiled by having a lot of intelligent female friends, but we're looking for someone to spend time with, not just someone to make a baby with.

Then you picked the wrong woman

[DG]

Seriously, if you have to make major alterations to your lifestyle in order to keep your wife/girfriend happy, then you chose the wrong wife/girlfriend.

Your signifigant other and you should share goals and lifestyles; you should click into each other's lives with little to no behavioural modification for either party.

Your primary disagreements should be about *timing*, not philosophy - ie, you both want to do X, and the only real question is "when?". If you want X and she wants Y... problem.

Note that I'm talking in broad strokes here. Both of you will have to modifiy little bits of your behaviour as "social grease" to help make it easier to get along. There is plenty of give and take in a good marriage. But the give and take should be over small stuff, not major life issues & choices.

I was one of those guys who tried to overhaul his personality to fit the needs and wants of the Girl of the Moment, and that only ever led to tears. Once I decided to be me, and to find a girl that fit me the way I was (and vice versa) I met my wife and I've been blissfully happy (on the marital front at least) ever since.

I think a lot of guys, particularly technical, goal-oriented guys, get focussed on "making the relationship work" and start making these big personal sacrifices to that end, thinking that it gets them points. It doesn't. If you have to make radical alterations to who you are in order to keep your girlfriend, then let her go and find one who likes you as you are.

DG

Re:Then you picked the wrong woman

[Alric]

This advice is fine but not necessarily true.

Enjoying a spouse openly, comfortably, and even vulnerably is certainly a trait of a successful relationship. However, a successful marriage is not built on enjoying each other and "being who you really are." Those are effects, not causes of a happy relationship, IMO.

Most couple don't truly realize marriage is (in theory) a lifetime commitment. Here's the big secret nobody tells young couples: people change. You and your spouse are going to change dramatically over the course of your marriage, and there's a likelihood that unless you are careful, you will end up disliking each other in 30 years. The best you can hope for is that as each of you changes, the other will adapt to your new personality or have ability to tell you calmly that you are changing for the worse. I won't go into a long tangent about the requisites for changing together successfully, but I basically think deep mutual respect and completely honest communication are the biggest ingredients.

Here's the other part of your sentiment that is slightly flawed. Perhaps you really need to change. Maybe you are an inconsiderate, arrogant asshole, and the only person who would date you is a meek little insecure person who will let you walk all over him/her. Maybe a partner is trying to change you for the better.

But yes, I absolutely agree with you: being comfortable and open with your partner is absolutely essential. If you don't have that, it seems that you're missing the fundamental point of dating and marriage (at least for secular humanists). The most you can hope for in this life is to understand yourself and this world around you. By loving, trusting, living with and focusing all of your powers of observation and appreciation on this one person, maybe -- just maybe -- you will understand humanity, yourself, and this whole absurd universe a tiny bit better.

That's my current theory at least. It will probably change next year.

Re:sensationalisation sucks

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly judge a man's interest in having children merely by looking at cues on photograph's of his facial features.

Wow, that's like... 7 in 10 instead of 5 in 10 you might expect to get from chance alone. Remarkable

Agree on concepts, disagree on terminology

[DG]

I think we are in perfect agreement on the core concepts, but we seem to differ on the terminology.

And maybe on this - yes, maybe you really are an arrogant asshole who NEEDS to change in order to become a better person. But that is YOUR responsibility, and you will have to realize the necessity and then actualize the change more or less on your own, or it'll never take.

Because if your girlfriend is attempting to change you away from that sort of behaviour... flip it around to her perspective. Now SHE is breaking the "I can change him!" rule and SHE is in danger of having it end in tears.

You cannot force major changes in behavioral philosophy in the context of a relationship. You can help someone who *wants* to change themself, and you can make minor changes (for example, I'm a lot better about leaving dirty socks lying around than I once was :) but life is too short to try and make major changes to somebody else's personality, and the attempt almost NEVER works.

You time is much better spent finding the person who is a match for your personality - or if it is YOU who are the problem, making the changes to your personality yourself.

Big agreement on "deep mutual respect and completely honest communication" though. If that respect and honesty are not there, LEAVE.

I know a lot of guys who got into horrible relationships because they convinced themselves that the girl was their last chance, and they made sacrifice after sacrifice after sacrifice to try and keep her around - and then one day the boom gets lowered and they are heartbroken ON TOP OF all those months/years of suffering. There's no such thing as a "last chance" or "only hope" - learn to walk away! It's not personal failure to realize that the relationship isn't working.

While I'm at it, the phrase "she's out of my league" needs to be stricken from the language: the concept is fundamentally bogus. Why be self-limiting? Chase the one you want. And if she isn't interested, shrug and move on.

DG